Backswing (follow through) Interference

[ctblu40]

American Legion (OBR)
R2- stealing on pitch, 1 out, no count on B1.

B1 swings and misses at the pitch, his follow through hits F2's throwing hand as he is throwing to retire R2 at 3rd.

I call "That's Interference" while pointing at B1. The throw is wide left, and unsuccessful at putting R2 out. I call "Time!, You (pointing at B1), stay there! You (pointing at R2) back to second!"

Offensive manager is upset because I put R2 back... then defensive manager is upset (he was getting pretty close to being run, he stopped after I warned him) because I did not declare B1 out.

Did I screw the pooch?

[tibear]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

American Legion (OBR)
R2- stealing on pitch, 1 out, no count on B1.

B1 swings and misses at the pitch, his follow through hits F2's throwing hand as he is throwing to retire R2 at 3rd.

I call "That's Interference" while pointing at B1. The throw is wide left, and unsuccessful at putting R2 out. I call "Time!, You (pointing at B1), stay there! You (pointing at R2) back to second!"

Offensive manager is upset because I put R2 back... then defensive manager is upset (he was getting pretty close to being run, he stopped after I warned him) because I did not declare B1 out.

Did I screw the pooch?

Looking at OBR 6.06 (c)
(c) He interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base. EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter’s interference.
Rule 6.06(c) Comment: If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference.
If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual interference and that runner is out—not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is no actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called.
If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire’s judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.

In your situation, F2 had secure posession of the ball and was attempting to throw the ball so the last part of the comment really doesn't apply. As with any BI call the batter isn't expected to simply disappear.

Because the batter didn't do anything out of the ordinary to get in the way of the catcher, I would have called nothing and let the play stand.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Did I screw the pooch?

Yes. Once F2 has secure control of the ball, the play becomes interference (not weak interference).

[LMan]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

the play becomes interference (not weak interference).

..and if the batter did nothing otherwise deliberate to interfere, you didn't have INT.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

American Legion (OBR)
R2- stealing on pitch, 1 out, no count on B1.

B1 swings and misses at the pitch, his follow through hits F2's throwing hand as he is throwing to retire R2 at 3rd.

I call "That's Interference" while pointing at B1. The throw is wide left, and unsuccessful at putting R2 out. I call "Time!, You (pointing at B1), stay there! You (pointing at R2) back to second!"

Offensive manager is upset because I put R2 back... then defensive manager is upset (he was getting pretty close to being run, he stopped after I warned him) because I did not declare B1 out.

Did I screw the pooch?

If it happened as you say ("B1 swings and misses at the pitch, his follow through hits F2's throwing hand as he is throwing to retire R2 at 3rd.") and F2 did not retire R2, then I have Batter Interference, "TIME" R2 back to 2nd base, B1 out (if he interfered, the batter has to be out).

Regards

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes. Once F2 has secure control of the ball, the play becomes interference (not weak interference).

OOPS -- my mistake.

From MLBUM (emphasis added):

6.9 BACKSWING (FOLLOW-THROUGH) HITS CATCHER
If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and in the umpire's judgment unintentionally hits the
catcher or the ball in back of the batter on the follow-through or backswing while the batter is
still in the batter's box, it shall be called a strike only (no interference). The ball will be dead,
however, and no runner shall advance on the play. If this infraction should occur in a situation
where the catcher's initial throw directly retires a runner despite the infraction, the play stands the
same as if no violation had occurred. If this infraction should occur in a situation where the batter
would normally become a runner because of a third strike not caught, the ball shall be dead and
the batter declared out.
This interpretation applies even if the catcher is in the act of making a throw to retire a runner.
That is, if the batter is in the batter's box and his normal backswing or follow-through
unintentionally strikes the catcher or the ball while the catcher is in the act of throwing, "Time"
is called and runners return (unless the catcher's initial throw retires the runner).

[tibear]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

OOPS -- my mistake.

From MLBUM (emphasis added):

6.9 BACKSWING (FOLLOW-THROUGH) HITS CATCHER
If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and in the umpire's judgment unintentionally hits the
catcher or the ball in back of the batter on the follow-through or backswing while the batter is
still in the batter's box, it shall be called a strike only (no interference). The ball will be dead,
however, and no runner shall advance on the play. If this infraction should occur in a situation
where the catcher's initial throw directly retires a runner despite the infraction, the play stands the
same as if no violation had occurred. If this infraction should occur in a situation where the batter
would normally become a runner because of a third strike not caught, the ball shall be dead and
the batter declared out.
This interpretation applies even if the catcher is in the act of making a throw to retire a runner.
That is, if the batter is in the batter's box and his normal backswing or follow-through
unintentionally strikes the catcher or the ball while the catcher is in the act of throwing, "Time"
is called and runners return (unless the catcher's initial throw retires the runner).

So I guess posession of the ball by F2 doesn't matter as per 6.06(c).

General rule is: If F2 is unintentionally hit by a swing follow through(if batter remains in batter's box) and F2 cannot make a play on a runner, the play is dead and all runners return to their TOP base.

[LMan]

Thanks for clarifying

[RPatrino]

Didn't the fact you called "that's interference" commit you to calling B1 out? I think that if you didnt' judge the contact to be intentional then you were correct in your ruling, however you should have given the 'that's nothing' signal.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Didn't the fact you called "that's interference" commit you to calling B1 out?

No.

[RPatrino]

I suppose it would be like calling 'that's obstruction' and not awarding bases? My question is, you have to have judged intent in order to call B1 out, but not to verbalize 'that's interference'? Or am I splitting hairs?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Didn't the fact you called "that's interference" commit you to calling B1 out? I think that if you didnt' judge the contact to be intentional then you were correct in your ruling, however you should have given the 'that's nothing' signal.

What's wrong with saying "I called interference, but I was wrong, no interference, runner returns to second base?" An umpire is not "committed" to his call. He can reverse himself if he know he made the wrong ruling. It sure beats reworking a game due to protest.

[UmpJM]

Guys,

It IS interference - specifically, "backswing interference". The (only) penalty is that a runner attempting to advance is returned to his TOP base unless he was retired by the catcher's throw despite the Backswing Interference.

If it's "Nothing", you don't send the R1 back to 1B (which you do if you want to properly rule on this play).

JM

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Didn't the fact you called "that's interference" commit you to calling B1 out?

EXACTLY what the defensive manager said... my response to him was that just because there was interference on the play doesn't mean there is an out. I told him this sitch is not unlike umpire interfing with F2's throw, the runner just returns.

I don't think a good choice of mechanics would be to call "Time" because what if F2's throw retires R2?

Do we agree that I got the call right, even if for the wrong reason?

[JeremyByrd]

I agree that you made the correct call. I found something similar to Bob's clarification in the JR manual